Lead out. You hit big, and have the same drawiness (??) as villain. Villain here is tending toward looser play, so 1/2 - 3/4 pot should do well to get good info.

Alternative is the C/R. If villain has unmatched pp, he will fear this flop. Even a check here to him could scream 'trap'. So your take on your own table image comes into play. Have you shown the ability to trap?

#3

18th March 2008, 6:21 PM

zachvac [7,835]

Online Poker at: Pokerstars

Game: NL Hold 'em

Ouch, this is ugly. The problem is the only hand I can see that does this that you have beat is KK, unless he does this with TT- or AT-.

This is also a horrible position to be in preflop. If you re-raise this you're committing yourself, and an AA-KK is getting value but a QQ could fold to a 4-bet. But if you call you still have no idea if this is AA-KK or worse, and to add to the problem you are OOP. This is where sometimes I'll even consider folding this preflop, just because with this huge raise he leaves no real good move for you, and you don't have much committed at that point. Postflop I'd check-call any reasonable bet, and then re-evaluate on the turn, folding to any shoves or near-shoves.

#4

18th March 2008, 6:26 PM

THe Slob [149]

Poker at: Tilt & Stars

Game: O8 and HA

I agree with dj here. You can easily bet this flop to see where you're at. You've got a good hand, TPTK, a draw to the straight, and a back door nut flush draw. Lead out. At the .5/.10 the re-raise could mean anything from AA-10,10. I had a guy move in on me yesterday after I raised UTG with AA, I called and he turned over pocket 4's.

NO we didn't. Consider villain's range for a split second and you'll see why.

Quote:

Originally Posted by dj11

Villain here is tending toward looser play, so 1/2 - 3/4 pot should do well to get good info.

Info is not what we're after here. We know what villain's relative range is - a big ace or a medium-big pair - and we don't shape up to well against it.

What worse hands call when you bet? What better ones fold?

Quote:

Originally Posted by dj11

Alternative is the C/R. If villain has unmatched pp, he will fear this flop.

Exactly. What purpose does betting have then? Strike fear into him? What good does that do?

We're wa/wb here and we should play be keeping the pot as small as possible. We're either up against AQ/AJ/AA/QQ/JJ and are crushed, or we're way ahead of KK/TT/AT. Betting yields less EV than check-calling does here.

I started getting sick of reposting links to the wa/wb thread, but it seems you guys still aren't getting it.

I agree with dj here. You can easily bet this flop to see where you're at. You've got a good hand, TPTK, a draw to the straight, and a back door nut flush draw. Lead out or go for a C/R.

But what hands besides a complete bluff do we have beat here that 3bet preflop? Any bluff will fold to a lead out and the hands we are beaten by either call or raise this. So we get no value, besides possibly KK, and we spew to the hands that have us beat. Poker is more than just our cards.

#7

18th March 2008, 6:52 PM

THe Slob [149]

Online Poker at: Tilt & Stars

Game: O8 and HA

I have no problem with a check/call of any reasonable bet. Personally, I'd rather bet here.

Quote:

Originally Posted by zachvac

But what hands besides a complete bluff do we have beat here that 3bet preflop

Here I was just considering the players I typically encounter at these stakes, which are what I play. I've been re-raised by less than pocket 10's on many occassions.

A call or a lead out on this flop is also based on the villian. If he's a rock that's been sitting there and and hasn't raised or re-raised preflop without showing down a monster, I'd have probably folded preflop.

I have no problem with a check/call of any reasonable bet. Personally, I'd rather bet here.

ok, but what reasoning do you have? What you prefer means nothing to the poster. He wants to know what the best course of action is in terms of long-term EV.

Quote:

Originally Posted by THe Slob

Here I was just considering the players I typically encounter at these stakes, which are what I play. I've been re-raised by less than pocket 10's on many occassions.

Again, what action will 77 for ex give you on this board?

How likely do you think he is to call if you lead?
How likely do you think he is to bet if you check?

#9

18th March 2008, 7:16 PM

switch0723 [8,451]

Quote:

Originally Posted by ChuckTs

I started getting sick of reposting links to the wa/wb thread, but it seems you guys still aren't getting it.

http://www.cardschat.com/f49/wa-wb-concept-76525/

I understand it all because of your wise teachings

I also check call here, on the basis of what chuck said that only hands that have us beat will call a bet. But also because a check enables the lesser hands such as a pp, a loose j,t, pock kings, etc etc, to bet into us, thus extracting value from the hands we beat. By betting, all those hands we beat will fold

Add these to the range and we end up with AA,KK, QQ, JJ, TT, KT, 9T, plus any other pp's that villain may have fallen in love with, along with any 2 diamond hand, and the hands that are clearly ahead of us here are in the area of 25% of the hands we might ascribe to villain. Suggesting we are ahead ~~~ 75% of the time.

Love your stats, and respect you ability to make statistically based plays most of the time. I don't. I have a working understanding of stats but the game is as much about the players as the cards.

Again with my BIG CAVEAT! I play tourneys, and my thinking is much more tourney based, and thus could be totally wrong for this situation.

But i don't think so.

Edit add;

Perhaps what we are missing here is hero's image. Both statistically, and what he thinks others think about him.

Certainly if his image is ROCK, and he bets out here there will only be one or 2 hands that will challenge, and that is KT (any) or Qx (diamonds). Assuming of course that villain has even been paying attention to table image.

#11

18th March 2008, 11:33 PM

THe Slob [149]

Online Poker at: Tilt & Stars

Game: O8 and HA

I still like betting out here as opposed to check calling, especially since Iím OOP. If you bet out and youíre way behind, on this draw heavy board, youíre going to find out real quick. If I bet 1/2 the pot and get re-raised, Iím done with the hand. If I bet and get smooth called, and I donít improve on the turn, Iím through putting money in the pot, unless of course they check behind and I improve on the river (although I doubt any hand strong enough to call the flop would check behind on the turn), or Iím getting really good pot odds to call a turn bet. If you check, it gives a hand like KK the opportunity to steal the hand away if he puts you on a hand exactly like you have, and knows you canít call a large bet with that board.

If I had position on the PFR, and they checked the flop Iíd check behind to try and induce a turn bet by those hands Iím ahead of. But, unfortunately Iím first to act. I know by leading at this flop youíre going to get no action from someone pushing pocket 77ís or any other PP or other hand that missed the board, which will cost you positive EV in the long run those times when a worse hand will bet into you. Any hand that youíre way ahead of here is probably going to try and check this down if they miss the turn and river. Of course you have ask your self, if you check and they check behind, are they trying to check down a weak hand, or do they have a monster and are trying to induce a weaker hand (your hand) to bet the turn, the essence of the wa/wb concept.

As I stated above, I have no problem with a check/call of any reasonable sized bet (as long as itís a size you would have lead out with), but I think betting here is still the best option. Personally, I donít like check calling because you donít know where you are at in the hand. If you check and they bet, is it just a continuation bet, or did they hit big and are now trying to suck some more $ out of you? If you check and call, are you going to call a turn bet if you donít improve? How large of a bet are you going to call? I thought the whole idea of wa/wb was to keep the pot small as possible when you have a good hand but youíre not sure if you have the best hand. Check calling here gives the villain control of the pot size. To quote from dbitel the original poster of the wa/wb thread ďWhen OOP, betting certainly becomes a more attractive option, as its harder to control the pot size OOPĒ

Of course Iím not saying this is the only way to play the hand or even the best way to play the hand. As my granddad was fond of saying, ďThereís more than one-way to get into a cheerleaders skirt.Ē Iím just giving my opinion on how I would play the hand.

#12

18th March 2008, 11:42 PM

phatjose [222]

Game: HORSE

A couple of further notes about the player. He generally seemed to be bad overall. He ended up busting out a few hands after this with something like J2o when he caught a pair of jacks and went to town with them.

Over ~6000 hands at 10 NL my stats are roughly 19/11/3, but in this case I recently showed down a hand where I raised from late position with 67s and then caught trips to crack someones aces. So the villain may possibly have remembered that I have been playing, and raising, stuff like small suited connectors (although I would probably wouldn't do it with a limper already in the pot). Then again, maybe that is giving the villain too much credit.

As Chuck said, I am most interested in the long term best play, which, since I am posting this hand, should lead you to believe I am not sure I made the best play

What I really hate most about the WA/WB situations is being OOP like in this case.

You say that villain might get frisky with hands such as j,t, q,t, low pp's (all the hands that we beat), so why would you suggest betting into them. That would reduce the chances of them getting 'frisky'. Surely if you want them to get 'frisky' you use the wa/wb concept and allow them to bet into you and keep them in the hand by calling. Check calling is the only way to get value from worse hands and keep the pot small agaisnt better hands.

Also we are beat by a,q, a,j and q,j aswell, all of which are in villains range

WAY to many people are suggesting to bet out for 'information'. basically saying, if you bet out, you will now if you are losing since you will get re raised. Well what if you are flat called, what do you do with your top pair on a junk turn? Bet out for 'information' again

Betting out for information causes 2 scenarios, it wins you the pot against hands you beat, and so loses value against the j,t low pp hands. Which all have the opportunity to bluff at the pot when checked to, thus increasing value.

Or your bet gets re raised or called by a hand that has you crushed, then you fold right.

So analyzing the 2 possibilities produces these results.

By leading out, we win the pot as it is against all the hands we beat, or we just give chips away to hands that crush us, (literally just giving the chips away).

By checking, we induce bluffs from hands we beat and enable us to keep the pot small against hands we dont

Im finding it really hard to explain why betting out gets all hands we beat to fold, while checking has the same effect as the pot size doesnt change and we still beat the hands we beat, but induce bluffs to increase value against these lesser hands.

#14

18th March 2008, 11:58 PM

switch0723 [8,451]

ok well me edit button on the above post is broken it seems as the swirly thing next to it is just swirling and not actually letting me edit. So

Above post edit: If anyone doesnt understand the wa/ab scenario and thinks leading out is better, answer this question.

What do you achieve by leading out with pocket kings on an ace high drawless flop?

You really think someone that is 24/7/1.8 is 3-betting with JT, 9T, QT, or Any PP below TT?? I really cant see anyone who only raises 7% of the time 3 betting any of those hands.

#16

19th March 2008, 2:23 AM

zachvac [7,835]

Poker at: Pokerstars

Game: NL Hold 'em

Quote:

Originally Posted by bw07507

You really think someone that is 24/7/1.8 is 3-betting with JT, 9T, QT, or Any PP below TT?? I really cant see anyone who only raises 7% of the time 3 betting any of those hands.

Of course this is irrelevant. Betting out gives you information, but it costs you money. But why do you want information? Is there a pop quiz at the end of this hand that I didn't know about? Last I checked the point was to maximize the chips you get (and that includes minimizing the chips you lose). You could go all-in here too, that would get you information fast, if you're beat they'll probably call and you'll get to see his cards. See the fallacy?

Again, please answer what hands would call your bet that you have beat (thus it's a value bet) and what hands would fold that have you beat (thus it's a bluff)? So if your bet neither gets value nor achieves a bluff, why would you bet? The one final criteria also is are there any hands that would fold to a bet that have a chance to improve to beat your hand on later streets? Giving them a free card is a mistake, but what part of their range is in that position? Literally only KK, as they are drawing to a set or straight (and even their set doesn't make them very happy, and their straight also gives you the straight, so it's not a huge blow if that happens).

#17

19th March 2008, 2:26 AM

bw07507 [2,227]

Quote:

Of course this is irrelevant. Betting out gives you information, but it costs you money. But why do you want information? Is there a pop quiz at the end of this hand that I didn't know about? Last I checked the point was to maximize the chips you get (and that includes minimizing the chips you lose). You could go all-in here too, that would get you information fast, if you're beat they'll probably call and you'll get to see his cards. See the fallacy?

Again, please answer what hands would call your bet that you have beat (thus it's a value bet) and what hands would fold that have you beat (thus it's a bluff)? So if your bet neither gets value nor achieves a bluff, why would you bet? The one final criteria also is are there any hands that would fold to a bet that have a chance to improve to beat your hand on later streets? Giving them a free card is a mistake, but what part of their range is in that position? Literally only KK, as they are drawing to a set or straight (and even their set doesn't make them very happy, and their straight also gives you the straight, so it's not a huge blow if that happens).

I wasnt talking about postflop at all, just the villains 3-bet preflop.

#18

19th March 2008, 2:58 AM

zachvac [7,835]

Poker at: Pokerstars

Game: NL Hold 'em

Quote:

Originally Posted by bw07507

I wasnt talking about postflop at all, just the villains 3-bet preflop.

ok, I was just saying that whether it is or not has no bearing on what to do postflop here. Whether he plays 23o or 97o or 25s here or not, we still should check-call this.

#19

21st March 2008, 12:16 PM

Richyl2008 [731]

Game: Bumhunting

I'm not a big fan of calling villains large reraise out of position preflop. I think his bet is large enough that you are not getting good enough implied odds on his effective stack size to try and flop an ace or king since you'll be whiffing the flop the majority of the time. To me this is an allin reraise or fold depending on the player and your bankroll situation. Since this player has only been raising 7 percent of his hands, I would probably tend to fold, since his range is most likely very small for reraising JJ+AK AQs and i wouldnt count on much fold equity. As played you have put yourself in a tough situation. With tptk, gutshot straight draw, and backdoor nut flush draw, I'm not folding this in a pot this big, the money is going in. I'd come out betting and expect to get it in regardless if he raises or not, worst case scenario he has a set in which case you still have outs. The money already in the pot will give you enough equity against his range to make it a profitable play.

#20

21st March 2008, 12:39 PM

switch0723 [8,451]

re: Poker & 10NL, TPTK on drawy board

^^^^ I really really really doubt it is a profitable play to get your money in on this board everytime on the basis you will be the underdog in the hand every time you do so and may very well be drawing to only 4 outs.